Re: Tagging text as being in arbitrary complex-script languages

[Richard Wordingham <richard.wordingham@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 20:40:01 +0100
Richard Wordingham <richard.wordingham@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 12:25:11 +0200
> Eike Rathke <erack@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > Though with sa-Latn
> > I doubt there's a use case, so I wouldn't call that "correct" in
> > common sense.  
> 
> So how do you suggest we tag Sanskrit in Latin script?

In answer to what was intended to be a rhetorical question, I suppose
und-Latn-t-sa-m0-iast and und-Latn-t-sa-m0-iso would work for the
normative forms. I've successfully loaded a mocked up extension for the
former (as explicitly using a Western script), though I don't much like
the consequent tagging <style:text-properties ... fo:language="und"> in
the document's content.xml. That's a problem with the 't' extension.
Transliteration may change the language of place names in isolation,
but it doesn't really change the language of paragraphs of text.

Richard.
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice